Tweet
In March 2016 I bought a used car from a dealer in Bury Lancashire advertised on Autotrader. When I visited the dealer the car wasn't there it was In Tunbridge Wells.
A week or so later the car was brought to Bury for me to view. After a short test and inspection, I left with the car.
I had had it less than 2 weeks, when I found a broken spring on the car. It was so heavily corroded it had obviously been broken for some time.
The car was sold as having one owner with a full service history and a new mot with no advisories.
I had the car examined by a Mazda main agent that found all the springs were corroded, the brakes disks pitted and the pads close to service limit and an oil leak in the rear wheel drive transmission.
Consequently, after no response from the dealer, I rejected the car in writing well within the 30 days allowed by the CRA and demanded a full refund.
In the next week the dealer recovered the car.
Without informing me, they replaced the spring with an unspecified part, ignored the other faults, and demanded I collect the car, I refused.
After a standoff of about a year, the dealer suggested I make a complaint to the motoring ombudsman (TMO - Motorcodes). I discovered the dealer had not complied in any way with the the TMO code of conduct. The dealer had not provide any of the documents required by the code of conduct e.g. inspection check list.
Two and half years later, the ombudsman finally made a provisional ruling in my favour. Stating she was satisfied I had an "automatic right of rejection", "no obligation to accept a repair" and that the defects were present at the time of purchase. She instructed the dealer to refund the full purchase price.
The dealer complained it "wasn't fair" that they should have to bear the costs of the decision and that TMO had taken too long to reach a decision and also that the complaint shouldn't have been accepted because of time limits. Neither TMO or the dealer had ever mentioned time limits.
A month or so later, without any new evidence from the dealer, other than internal invoices that say nothing about the state of vehicle and a cash offer for me to go away, the ombudsman reversed the decision and said that "whilst being mindful of the law" she also had to consider what was "fair". She also included statements in her decision which are claims by the dealer which are lies with no supporting evidence e.g.that I agreed for the car to be repaired - a baseless lie.
So over three and half years later I am back to square one. No car and no money.
I only have one option left and that is the courts. Hence, I am looking for a consumer rights lawyer. The search facility shows up nothing in the Northwest - really? Any suggestions?
Thanks.
SJS
SJS
A week or so later the car was brought to Bury for me to view. After a short test and inspection, I left with the car.
I had had it less than 2 weeks, when I found a broken spring on the car. It was so heavily corroded it had obviously been broken for some time.
The car was sold as having one owner with a full service history and a new mot with no advisories.
I had the car examined by a Mazda main agent that found all the springs were corroded, the brakes disks pitted and the pads close to service limit and an oil leak in the rear wheel drive transmission.
Consequently, after no response from the dealer, I rejected the car in writing well within the 30 days allowed by the CRA and demanded a full refund.
In the next week the dealer recovered the car.
Without informing me, they replaced the spring with an unspecified part, ignored the other faults, and demanded I collect the car, I refused.
After a standoff of about a year, the dealer suggested I make a complaint to the motoring ombudsman (TMO - Motorcodes). I discovered the dealer had not complied in any way with the the TMO code of conduct. The dealer had not provide any of the documents required by the code of conduct e.g. inspection check list.
Two and half years later, the ombudsman finally made a provisional ruling in my favour. Stating she was satisfied I had an "automatic right of rejection", "no obligation to accept a repair" and that the defects were present at the time of purchase. She instructed the dealer to refund the full purchase price.
The dealer complained it "wasn't fair" that they should have to bear the costs of the decision and that TMO had taken too long to reach a decision and also that the complaint shouldn't have been accepted because of time limits. Neither TMO or the dealer had ever mentioned time limits.
A month or so later, without any new evidence from the dealer, other than internal invoices that say nothing about the state of vehicle and a cash offer for me to go away, the ombudsman reversed the decision and said that "whilst being mindful of the law" she also had to consider what was "fair". She also included statements in her decision which are claims by the dealer which are lies with no supporting evidence e.g.that I agreed for the car to be repaired - a baseless lie.
So over three and half years later I am back to square one. No car and no money.
I only have one option left and that is the courts. Hence, I am looking for a consumer rights lawyer. The search facility shows up nothing in the Northwest - really? Any suggestions?
Thanks.
SJS
SJS
Comment